Sony: PS4 “nearly doubles” Xbox One’s US sales in January

Tomb Raider sells more on PS4 as well, showing strong momentum for Sony.

NPD might not be talking specific ratios, but Sony is trumpeting the PlayStation 4’s performance in light of the tracking firm’s video game market report. In a Playstation.Blog post, Sony Computer Entertainment America Marketing VP John Koller said sales for the PS4 in January "nearly [doubled] the nearest next-gen competitor,” which NPD confirmed was the Xbox One.

From a raw numbers perspective, January’s performance registers as barely a blip compared to recent holiday sales numbers. The Xbox One sold an estimated 143,000 units in the US in January, compared to over 900,000 when it led the US market in December. The report doesn’t reflect sales in the rest of the world, either, which previous console generations have shown can vary greatly from the US.

Further Reading

A strong launch is nice, but it doesn't necessarily imply long-term success.

Still, January’s numbers are an important sign of momentum for Sony’s system. I’ve been stressingfor months that the instant sell-outs and supply constraints of the holiday launch season meant that we wouldn’t have any real indication of which console the market may be favoring until the new year. Sony’s substantial January lead in the largest single market for consoles is a strong indicator that the PS4 is striking more of a chord with console buyers.

More worrying for Microsoft might be the way that this performance is bleeding into software sales. Spike TV’s Geoff Keighley reports via tweet that the PS4 version of Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition outsold its Xbox One counterpart two-to-one in January as well. It won’t take too many cross-console performances like that to get third-party developers wondering whether they should devote as much time or effort to a system that only provides half the bang for the buck.

I have trouble coming to the conclusion 3rd parties won't continue to make games for the x1, honestly. I am beginning to feel like all the stories painting the x1 as a dead platform are to get page views. I have mostly ignored them, but felt this was an ok space to point this out.

People always want to declare a winner... this is a marathon not a sprint. If they both make a profit that exceeds their expectations does them make them both winners? I'm also really curious how Nintendo gets back in the game.

Personally, I have been wondering if the hardware will be as stable spec wise as last Gen. We are so use to getting new phones with better specs, new Apple TVs, etc.

I wonder if MS or Sony will bump up their chips only two-three years in the cycle considering they will also have another challenger in Steam Box.

You know if this sales trend continues, MS will be cutting the price sooner than later. They do have a gigantic mountain of cash after all. Might they do something drastic like buy EA, 2K, or Zenimax?

My Xbox Live account asks me if the number I they have on file is good and if I can receive texts there once a week. If I say yes it takes me to another screen where it asks for an email address, a phone number, or a text address instead of sending me a security code to the number I've already verified as good. If I say no, it takes me to the same screen. When I enter my email address in the new screen it tells me they already have it. If I enter a number in the text screen it tells me I already have it. Ditto for the phone number.

Xbox live already has a contact number (cell phone and text) and an email address for the account. They do not need a second contact number (not everyone has one or cares to have a second number public).

If I log out and log back in it lets me skip the entire operation for another week. So ultimately the entire system is pointless but annoying.

And then there's the time I gave them a credit card number for a purchase--literally an hour on the phone with customer service insisting that they take it "off file" afterwards (oh, but while you have an active subscription you need a card on file, blah, blah, blah -- turn auto-renewal off -- not possible without another phone call).

The point of this screed is that Xbox Live is the secret sauce that has made Xbox worthwhile to me in the past but that is simply no longer the case. Actually having to deal with their customer service in the past and the current security loop at login means that I will not renew nor will I purchase an Xbox One.

It's not even the price in my case or the weaker performance of the hardware. It's the service itself.

Let's assume this is the sign of a worrying trend for Microsoft (which is difficult and silly to do after a single month of data, but, it gives us something to argue about) ... So what is causing it, and what do they do? Is it just a matter of the price? (i.e. Microsoft should hurry along the rumored additional models that perhaps unbundle the Kinect and cut the price by $100 or more) or is there a fundamental fault in the hardware itself, or its positioning?

My perspective: I'm an admitted XBox fanboy. I have nothing against Sony and think the PS4 is a great piece of kit, but when I tire of my 360, I'll get an XB1. And while I didn't feel this way initially, I'm starting to wonder if Microsoft's focus on the media/television capabilities was a miss. I already have multiple devices in my house that can show me content or interface with my TV in one way or another. The appeal of yet-another-box with its own ecosystem doing the same thing is minimal. What is limited, however, are devices that play the AAA-level games I enjoy. I have plenty of casual gaming options, but few hardcore gaming ones. And this is where I think Sony's focus has been better: The PS4 is first and foremost a next-gen gaming device and I think is appealing very strongly to early adopters as a result.

There's always the possibility that in the long-run, Microsoft's broader focus will benefit it among a wider population than just gamers, but that may take 3, 4, 5 years or longer to play out, and in the meantime, Kyle's proposed scenario (game companies de-prioritizing the XB1), however remote and unlikely given Microsoft's willingness to work closely with major developers, may kneecap it further.

So it's a matter of games people want, a pricepoint they want for the system, and possibly factoring in game performance is what's going on here.

I plan on getting a PS4 eventually, when those games that I can't live without come out. As long as they're essentially publishing the same experience on 360/ps3, that day keeps getting pushed out further.

I had a 360 for years, have had a ps3 for a year now. I just like what Sony's done more. I couldn't say that 6 years ago, as MS was great and Sony was still a bit clueless. But when you have the original kinect, which helped shape the awful and slow 360 interface and is a turd, MS's attitudes towards gamers (or at least Mattrick's attitude), and poor performing games compared to the PS4, all for the premium of $100, I don't see the point going MS this time.

Oh and Playstation Plus is outstanding for $50 a year. Besides the debatable "Free-ness" of games, I've saved well over $50 in discounts alone with Sony's much better (IMO) weekly sales.

I will be very disappointed if Microsoft releases an Xbox One SKU without Kinect because of this news. It already backtracked on digital licensing because the Internet bitched and moaned. It shouldn't compromise its vision even further because the fanboys aren't responding.

And while I didn't feel this way initially, I'm starting to wonder if Microsoft's focus on the media/television capabilities was a miss. I already have multiple boxes and devices in my house that can show me content or interface with my TV in one way or another.

I think that might be a valid point. You could pick up a PS4 plus a Chromecast for, what $30, or a Roku for about $50, or a blue-ray player with network capabilities for <$100 and get a bunch of media feature (Netflix, YouTube) without any additional subscriptions and still come out ahead versus buying an Xbox One.

[Full disclosure: I'm not a console game and never have been, so I really don't have a dog in this fight]

I have trouble coming to the conclusion 3rd parties won't continue to make games for the x1, honestly. I am beginning to feel like all the stories painting the x1 as a dead platform are to get page views. I have mostly ignored them, but felt this was an ok space to point this out.

I don't think that will happen either, since porting should be relatively easy due to the similarity of the hardware. However, why should any third party make XB1 exclusives if that's a smaller market? And if XB1 has fewer exclusives, why shouldn't consumers prefer PS? And then it's a vicious circle.

I will be very disappointed if Microsoft releases an Xbox One SKU without Kinect because of this news. It already backtracked on digital licensing because the Internet bitched and moaned. It shouldn't compromise its vision even further because the fanboys aren't responding.

Releasing a patch to divert GPU resources away from the Kinect to games is essentially the same thing.

They will not stop developing for the One, but it does give a shock to MS after having dominating the last gen for 90% of the over the PS3 (PS3 did catch up and possibly surpass in worldwide sales, but was never close in US sales).

I think it shows Sony was able to present a strong message and things like ESPN, UI for your cable box(instread of using the cable boxes one), Kinect and the like are that big on moving units. Having a solid core gaming experience and now better optimized graphics on multiplats is moving more units.

Who knew that a focus on games would sell game consoles (at a good price)? Sony was all over the map pushing the expensive Blu-Ray units, bad online system and pushing 3D.

The media features that are missing in the PS4 sucks but I have my doubts that is losing them out on a whole lot of sales.

So it's a matter of games people want, a pricepoint they want for the system, and possibly factoring in game performance is what's going on here.

I plan on getting a PS4 eventually, when those games that I can't live without come out. As long as they're essentially publishing the same experience on 360/ps3, that day keeps getting pushed out further.

I had a 360 for years, have had a ps3 for a year now. I just like what Sony's done more. I couldn't say that 6 years ago, as MS was great and Sony was still a bit clueless. But when you have the original kinect, which helped shape the awful and slow 360 interface and is a turd, MS's attitudes towards gamers (or at least Mattrick's attitude), and poor performing games compared to the PS4, all for the premium of $100, I don't see the point going MS this time.

Oh and Playstation Plus is outstanding for $50 a year. Besides the debatable "Free-ness" of games, I've saved well over $50 in discounts alone with Sony's much better (IMO) weekly sales.

My point was that neither system really has any killer games yet. Titanfall will be the first game to sell systems. Once each system has their respective exclusive killer-games out, we'll have a good picture of what is going on. Until then, it is just RAMPANT speculation.

When you look at the January numbers, BOTH consoles fell sharply in sales. The fact that Xbox fell a bit more sharply than the PS4 relatively speaking isn't a big deal.

I have trouble coming to the conclusion 3rd parties won't continue to make games for the x1, honestly. I am beginning to feel like all the stories painting the x1 as a dead platform are to get page views. I have mostly ignored them, but felt this was an ok space to point this out.

I don't think that will happen either, since porting should be relatively easy due to the similarity of the hardware. However, why should any third party make XB1 exclusives if that's a smaller market? And if XB1 has fewer exclusives, why shouldn't consumers prefer PS? And then it's a vicious circle.

I think both companies try to head off this scenario by bringing development of key exclusives in-house: Microsoft Studios (the Halo series, Gears Of War, etc.) is one example of this, I'm sure Sony has the equivalent, so I suspect the existence of exclusives is at sort of a "nuclear stockpile" balance between the two right now—It takes huge investment on the part of each company, but it keeps them largely even. Any third-party exclusives are just gravy.

I will be very disappointed if Microsoft releases an Xbox One SKU without Kinect because of this news. It already backtracked on digital licensing because the Internet bitched and moaned. It shouldn't compromise its vision even further because the fanboys aren't responding.

I too am terrified of a future where people do not buy superfluous hardware on the strength of ill-defined 'visions.'

"Yeah I know there are tens millions of xbox 360's with kinects and the only thing they're good for is dance games. I know that the Wii sold boatloads of units and even then third-party support of motion control was middling at best. But if we just force more motion sensors onto unwilling consumers THEN the motion-sensing game revolution will arrive drawn by twelve dancing unicorns."

I have trouble coming to the conclusion 3rd parties won't continue to make games for the x1, honestly. I am beginning to feel like all the stories painting the x1 as a dead platform are to get page views. I have mostly ignored them, but felt this was an ok space to point this out.

I don't think we'd ever see a situation where developers don't release on the X1, but they might decide to put more effort into a PS4 version that will sell more copies and then do a cheaper port to the X1.

Personally, I'm probably sitting this generation out. Long time xbox owner and a fan of most of the Halo series, but the requirement to keep xbox live sub up to date is wearing thin. I still want to jump into a Halo 4 or Reach game with some friends every once in a while, but no where near enough to justify the ongoing cost.

If they have some sort of price cut + xbox live is included for two years, then maybe -- but we all know that's not going to happen. If they were to remove some of the unnecessarily shackled services from the grip of Live, like Netflix, that might restore some good faith, but also -- not going to happen.

I have trouble coming to the conclusion 3rd parties won't continue to make games for the x1, honestly. I am beginning to feel like all the stories painting the x1 as a dead platform are to get page views. I have mostly ignored them, but felt this was an ok space to point this out.

I don't think that will happen either, since porting should be relatively easy due to the similarity of the hardware. However, why should any third party make XB1 exclusives if that's a smaller market? And if XB1 has fewer exclusives, why shouldn't consumers prefer PS? And then it's a vicious circle.

Companies tend to get paid to make exclusives. And remember, the PS3 had a historical install base deficit vs the 360 for a while in some major territories (IIRC), but this never slowed down that platform.

It'll all come out in a wash. I own both & a PC. I almost never turn on the PS4 (hopefully some game will come out convince me otherwise). X1 is on 100% of the time for media (i like voice controls, what can I say), and the PC has been doing all the gaming (what can I say, multiplatform games are just better on a PC)

I have trouble coming to the conclusion 3rd parties won't continue to make games for the x1, honestly. I am beginning to feel like all the stories painting the x1 as a dead platform are to get page views. I have mostly ignored them, but felt this was an ok space to point this out.

I don't think that will happen either, since porting should be relatively easy due to the similarity of the hardware. However, why should any third party make XB1 exclusives if that's a smaller market? And if XB1 has fewer exclusives, why shouldn't consumers prefer PS? And then it's a vicious circle.

Companies tend to get paid to make exclusives. And remember, the PS3 had a historical install base deficit vs the 360 for a while in some major territories (IIRC), but this never slowed down that platform.

It'll all come out in a wash. I own both & a PC. I almost never turn on the PS4 (hopefully some game will come out convince me otherwise). X1 is on 100% of the time for media (i like voice controls, what can I say), and the PC has been doing all the gaming (what can I say, multiplatform games are just better on a PC)

Well, you're sounding a lot like me except somehow you have justified the cost of two launch priced consoles, one which you admit you barely use. I'm also gaming mostly on the PC these days... So why even bother? The combined $1000 plus subscriptions is a whole lot of games on steam, or a seriously good system upgrade or new box.

I will be very disappointed if Microsoft releases an Xbox One SKU without Kinect because of this news. It already backtracked on digital licensing because the Internet bitched and moaned. It shouldn't compromise its vision even further because the fanboys aren't responding.

I too am terrified of a future where people do not buy superfluous hardware on the strength of ill-defined 'visions.'

"Yeah I know there are tens millions of xbox 360's with kinects and the only thing they're good for is dance games. I know that the Wii sold boatloads of units and even then third-party support of motion control was middling at best. But if we just force more motion sensors onto unwilling consumers THEN the motion-sensing game revolution will arrive drawn by twelve dancing unicorns."

Can you imagine the horrible future where people don't buy into that?

If people thought like you back in the 00s, we wouldn't have online multiplayer.

No. Wrong in every conceivable way.

If some console manufacturer forced people to get modems, broadband connections and routers that they had no interest in having for other purposes, then you might have a point. That never happened, though. Online multiplayer was present for tons of computer games; the console market was racing to catch up to an existing demand that was already being served in the PC market.

If someone can come up with a fantastic motion-control game, they can sell it to tens of millions of people with kinects, wiis and wii U's right now and that will drive demand for more motion sensors. The idea that the everyone has to possess a motion sensor for a motion control market to thrive is idiotic.

For motion controlled games, the install base is already sufficient for its killer app to roll in. Oh wait, it already did. It was called Wii Sports and it sold millions of units with the Wii in tow. The Wii was, for many people, little moe than a Wii Sports terminal. The game drove sales of hardware, which is how the market works everywhere in the universe outside of kinect fanboys' heads.

I will be very disappointed if Microsoft releases an Xbox One SKU without Kinect because of this news. It already backtracked on digital licensing because the Internet bitched and moaned. It shouldn't compromise its vision even further because the fanboys aren't responding.

I too am terrified of a future where people do not buy superfluous hardware on the strength of ill-defined 'visions.'

"Yeah I know there are tens millions of xbox 360's with kinects and the only thing they're good for is dance games. I know that the Wii sold boatloads of units and even then third-party support of motion control was middling at best. But if we just force more motion sensors onto unwilling consumers THEN the motion-sensing game revolution will arrive drawn by twelve dancing unicorns."

Can you imagine the horrible future where people don't buy into that?

They could have still provided digital licensing as an option. People wanted the option of being able to buy the disc that they can resell AND the PC Steam route of what you buy at retail is just a cd-key with the game content on disc to save you download time.

Without more information on how the whole license exchange system would work no one is sold on the idea of simply having faith MS will still allow them the ability to resell their games.

I have trouble coming to the conclusion 3rd parties won't continue to make games for the x1, honestly. I am beginning to feel like all the stories painting the x1 as a dead platform are to get page views. I have mostly ignored them, but felt this was an ok space to point this out.

Nobody is painting it as a dead platform. What's happening is what happened to the PS3, to a certain extent. That didn't kill the platform, but it did cause it to be a secondary one.

If the PS4 keeps the lead, and the XBox One remains in second, which could easily be what's happening, then it's the WiiU that could be the next dead platform, as it seems to be failing now, and Nintendo refuses to do anything different.

I am not surprised by the result the PS4 is more focused on gaming and cheaper than the Xbox One. It makes sense to me that the console that is built for gaming is doing better than one built and pitched as being primarily an entertainment hub.

The PS4 selling alot more games for software is going to make it hard for 3rd party developers to justify supporting Xbox One specific features like the Kinect motion control, which many of them don't seem to be doing anyways so far.

Really I would like to see the Xbox focus on gaming instead of this trojan horse entertainment vision. It was gaming which made the xbox and 360 popular and it was when MS started moving away from that focus is where I lost interest in my 360 and why I haven't been interested in the Xbox one.

Personally, I have been wondering if the hardware will be as stable spec wise as last Gen. We are so use to getting new phones with better specs, new Apple TVs, etc.

I wonder if MS or Sony will bump up their chips only two-three years in the cycle considering they will also have another challenger in Steam Box.

I've wondered this same thing. It seems now that the core hardware is only "semi-custom," to use AMD's nomenclature, it would be pretty easy to create a PS4.1 and XBone.1 that had puma cores instead of jaguar, some GPU improvements, etc. at the next process node down, and to maintain full backwards compatibility.

Really I would like to see the Xbox focus on gaming instead of this trojan horse entertainment vision. It was gaming which made the xbox and 360 popular and it was when MS started moving away from that focus is where I lost interest in my 360 and why I haven't been interested in the Xbox one.

This is where I start to lose my mind. Xbox One has a better launch lineup of games than the PS4 (although both were mediocre at best); most critics agree on that and from what I've played on both consoles it is true. They also have the first killer game coming up next month. They also still have their powerhouse exclusives and they have announced a host of new, innovative game types that may be great new IP. Whether or not you are riding the XB1 or PS4 pony this is a fact.

They are not "moving away" from games. It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time.

While on one hand I'm pleased at lower sales numbers for the Xone, I think that a number of the comments so far may be arguing a different cause and resolution.

As was referenced in the article, and in the article that was linked in support of that reference, the sales numbers are basically constrained by supply. So the question becomes "Did the Xone sell less then the PS4 because of a lack of demand, or did it sell less because of a lack of supply?"

The first means a problem with the offerings; that there's something there driving people away. The second means a problem with the supply chain; people are just as demanding of the product, but they just can't get their hands on one at the same rate.

Either one is a problem MS has to resolve, but the solutions are not the same.

Kyle Orland / Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area.